Sword and Sextant

Oh. My. Gosh.

So, Obama and Geithner publicly decry AIG executive bonuses they effing agreed to allow, and were actually questioned about on March 3rd, one week before they began paying out, whip up a veritable lynch mob against those same executives, and now move to more radical resolution.  Sinister and underhanded, just as we’ve come to expect, sadly enough.

Basically, Obama created a media monster himself, blamed it on Geithner, and he’ll now use the public furor to pass legislation regulating executive pay.  Importantly, I’m all for regulating pay of bailed out companies, as they owe a debt to the public before all else.  However, its clear that he’s going to attempt to pull this off on all companies, despite the very available fact that most companies aren’t going the AIG route.  In fact, subchapter S corporations regularly show owners making very little money in thinner years so their business will survive for the better times.  Can’t allow that shit, says our action hero/president.  Meanwhile, he signed a huge book deal right before taking office.  Something tells me the proceeds aren’t going to charity.  

Lesson:  Its okay for Barack to make money, but not anyone in the corporate world is allowed to.  Corporations are evil, and never do any good.  They must be stopped by your mother-state government.  (There’s a really good Pink Floyd song about Obama’s government called “Mother”.  Check it out.)

Its becoming readily apparent to me that Obama is willing to gin up panics and mindless fury for any political agenda he wants to sneak in the back door.  What a piss-poor way to treat the citizens and future of this country.  I wonder if anyone will be happy they voted for this man before he’s done torching the system and all of capitalism.

Does anyone yet realize that we’d have none of these problems if we just didn’t bail anyone out?  Anyone?  Think of it:  No GM execs begging congress for more and more of OUR money, no AIG exec bonuses, no problems.  Geithner and Obama want to say they had to pay exec bonuses because they are contractually obligated, and they are right, unless they go bankrupt!  Hey dumbasses, the answer has been here the whole time.  They knew that, though.  They knew the whole time.  It was never the point.  

Obama is willing to destroy lives to forward his agenda.  Just like Bush was willing to suffer collateral damage in Iraq, Obama is willing to suffer it here economically.  The difference, of course, is that one liberates a country, assuming we get our way, while the other simply gives the guvamint even more power over our lives as it destroys retirements and nesteggs.  What a fucking tradeoff.  If I destroy his teleprompter, will he not know to do these horrible things?  Might be worth the chance.

Mr. President, the media is on line 1.  They are not happy.

I fully realize this is a Democrat who hates the Democratic Party’s power brokers, but this woman voted for Barry, and she’s beginning to see some things she doesn’t like.  My personal experience is that a few of my centrist friends have felt some buyers’ remorse, and a few turncoat ex-GOPers are ready to walk the plank at this point.

Once more, this doesn’t have a whole lot to do with actual governing (with notable exceptions to the stimulus bill), but it does show that this man is not different from any other President, as we were promised from day one.  It shows that in some ways he is worse, but mostly just the same politics as usual.  Being from Illinois, this behavior is very familiar to me.  Problem is, the citizens of our nation are a much more aware populace than the voting herds drawn together by a younger Obama in Hyde Park.  We are very equipped to see this for what it is, and its happening, albeit slowly.

Mudslinging doesn’t work when you have a nation to run.  Just run the country.  It is what you were elected to do.

Ruh roh.  

Bloomberg is on to you, dog.  Seriously, your agenda would have been just fine if you had just waited for the economy to stabilize first, but you had to have a crisis to try and backdoor the whole thing.

Does Obama not get that his voting populace and brethren in the media are willing to follow him anywhere?  Why the strange rush to do everything in a month?  Why continue on, undaunted, when your plans are destroying people’s retirement funds on a daily basis?  Why play the fear card and scare everyone every day?

These are real people, and a bunch (most) of them voted for you.  Please don’t destroy their finances.  This country is great at making people rich unless you scare the crap out of them and mail billions in untracked dollars to failing banks and automakers.  They worked hard for what they had, and you’re killing them just to soak the rich in taxes or try and keep jobs here (by raising taxes, again).

Your agenda is not as important as the survival of this country, not to mention you still have years to accomplish it after this is over.  Instead, caught in your pride and zeal, you lead our nation into a financial pit, dragging the middle class and poor with you.  You took an oath to protect the country, but I see those were just words when you injure the market like this.

I doubt this is change anyone wants to believe in.

Hilarious.

How can the greatest communicator of all time have such a defect in his oratory skills?  I’m actually more comfortable when I have to wing something just on my knowledge and skills.  I realize that there are several things separating me from Barack Obama, but Christ, he can’t give a speech without someone feeding all the words to him?

I will say this has little to do with his governance, but it does reveal what my ilk have suspected the entire time.  Obama is probably a little more like a boy band than those who voted for him are willing to admit.  The unprecedented advisor entourages, the constant teleprompting, and meticulous media grooming speak to a very manufactured image.  The complete chaining of his administration to the common Left agenda suggests that Barry may be a trojan horse of liberalism piloted by a team of handlers and puppet masters.  I will certainly be paying attention to this development from now on.  Will he ever disagree with his shepherds and wield his office against their wishes?  He’s certainly going to have that opportunity with the war stuff.

Note:  He did alright in the debates, but what explains the total Um-fests and stutters we heard on a few campaign stops each month where the prompter crapped out?  

Very rarely have we seen emotion, candor, or unscripted behavior of any kind.  People flayed Bush for being somewhat less than stellar at the microphone, but very few of his speeches were ever fed to him by the good LCD angels.  

Every movement, law, speech, and day of this administration scares the living hell out of me.  I’m serious, this man terrifies me.  Its not even about politics at this point.

There is a lot at stake in this court hearing today.

I don’t particularly have a problem with gay unions, lifestyles, etc., but this case is quite literally a hearing to determine if the voting populace of California gets a voice.  Normally, the whole Democracy thing makes this a done deal and beyond debate, but apparently if you scream and moan loud enough, a court will suspend the most important pillar of our society in order to consider if we can really go with this whole majority rules thing.

I’m not getting into a debate of whether gays should be treated equally or whatever.  My issue is that we’re going to let a court potentially reverse a statewide vote on this exact law.  Why do all courts suddenly believe that they are legislators?  Do they know that the reason they don’t have to be elected is because they interpret the law, rather than write it?

I completely understand that gays want this badly.  Again, staying out of the merit of their cause, if you lose an election, you keep campaigning and winning hearts and minds.  Storming the courts like lawless barbarians and demanding they go against a fair and legal vote is crass and embarrassing to your cause.  This country will eventually come around on this, but destroying the democratic process is a huge price to pay for turning the words civil union into marriage.  Remember, you’re battle is a legal one.  Achieving your goal by overthrowing a vote carries some serious irony with it, and taints the potential victory.

Finally, a win here is terrible PR for the gays anyhow.  If you wait and win the vote the next time it comes around, you already have the acceptance and assent of the majority of your peers.  If you stomp on the vote and shove it down everyone’s collective throat, then there will be more resentment by far.

I) Why diminish the tax exemption for giving to charities?  Don’t you tax things you DON”T want?  Seems like its going to result in less giving if its more expensive to do so.  Who is helped by this besides the Guvamint?

II) Why raise taxes on businesses ever?  Other than a sinister diversion from the fact that businesses pass taxes to the consumer (therefore its just another tax on the citizenry).  Businesses also pay the paychecks of everyone not working in the Guvamint, so reducing goods produced/sold by raising prices via taxation leads to less workforce volume.  Less workforce volume = Jobs lost, by the way.

III) Why raise the capital gains tax?  Not only does it make less money when raised, but over half this nation owns stakes in the stock market or some entity that produces capital gains.  401ks, IRAs, money markets, etc. all will suffer under this, and it won’t simply be the evil top 2% of the nation.  What is the idea here?

Extra Credit:  Explain how lowering charitable giving, injuring businesses by raising prices, and discouraging financial investment represent either change you can believe in or any sound financial plan.  Use complete, succinct sentences.  Additional scratch paper available at the front of the class.

George W. Bush failed before, and now Obama (with very little time comparably) has failed to prevent what appears to be the inevitability of a nuclear weapon in Iranian hands.  As Obama promises to sit down and speak with Iran, despite a long-running policy of not negotiating with rogue nations, Tehran has to believe they’ve got all the cards at this point.  Our sanctions don’t do anything but steel the populace against the US, and now they have something that will make us listen to them. 

Of course, we have a few wildcards the Iranians fear.  First, we stand a pretty good chance of fending off an impending attack on anyone simply with surveillance and some vigilance on the preempitve strike front.  Second, if we don’t do it (Does anyone think Obama will press this button ever?  I sure don’t.), Israel WILL, unless they are reduced to rubble before they act, I suppose.  Third, we have a great staging ground that the Iranians don’t dare bomb in Iraq.  It will be really tenuous to play Muslim unity if you bomb your Islamic neighbor, after all.  Fourth, we don’t really have to do anything we say we will to Iran.  Think of it as lying to a criminal to get him out of the hostage situation.  Hell yeah, Iran, we have your getaway car waiting for you out here!  

Following years of failed “diplomacy” and soft power, I wonder how Europe feels about this development in the wake of their foolish tactics with a nation run by a madman controlling an equally insane puppet.  A quick look at the globe reveals how much closer they happen to be to Iran than the hated United States.  I think history shows that in lieu of hitting the US the past few years, terror turned its fangs on the EU.  I also know the connection between terror and Iran is not a difficult one to make.  You can hear the uneasiness from here.

Now, I’m not gloating one bit, despite my tone.  This is a serious matter that needs to be dealt with in the way that most military crises are dealt with.  This, of course, is a very simple procedure in which you threaten extreme force (ie targeted strikes), give a timeline for them to give up, and follow through on your promise if need be.  

I sure hope this happens, because we will be at war with Iran if they bomb Israel as, I can’t stress this enough, they have promised to do.  Its how alliances work, and this particular alliance is quite strong.  Then we’ll be treated as badly as we were during Iraq once the going gets tough, which it will, and Europe will again find a convenient facade for their never-ending contempt for our nation.  The peaceniks will again claim its for oil or some other nonsense, although it may ring hollow next to pictures of a vaporized dome of the rock.  That said, people still believe 9-11 was an inside job, so I’ll put nothing past a tiny portion of the populace.

At any rate, Obama needs to show them the business end of threats of force.  I’d actually prefer if he cloaked it in talk of unity, change, and hope.  Its always way cooler when the dude pressing the kill button on you in a week can smile easily at you when 5 feet away.  If we let them put a nuke on a missile and blow it up over Israel, every drop of that blood is on our hands, despite the fact that half of Israel is Arabic. 

Isn’t it funny that no one mentions that?  Its true.  Doesn’t fit the whole “evil Jews” bullshit story, though.  So yeah, when Hamas bombs Iran, they are killing their own people.  Really cheapens the cause, all told.